I receive a message that purports to be from myself at an edge mta, I
am going to drop it not process it.
Any removal of a header that is obviously falseflagged introduces a
security risk, not reducing such risk. At most a flag -This header is
bogus would be more useful.
Thanks,
Bill Oxley
Messaging Engineer
Cox Communications, Inc.
Alpharetta GA
404-847-6397
bill.oxley at cox.com
-----Original Message-----
From: mail-vet-discuss-bounces at mipassoc.org
[mailto:mail-vet-discuss-bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of SM
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 12:40 AM
To: mail-vet-discuss at mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [mail-vet-discuss] Re: Auth-Results issues? #7 section 4.1
Hi Murray,
At 12:43 27-04-2006, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
In section 4:
>"For security reasons, an MTA SHOULD remove ..."
Shouldn't that be:
"For security reasons, an MTA MUST remove any discovered instance"
The draft mentions "If an MTA applies any authentication test, it
MUST add this header" and the removal should be a MUST as well.
Modified text for Section 4:
For security reasons, an MTA MUST remove any discovered instance of
this header for which the "hostname" is its own, i.e. headers which
claim to be from the MTA but were added before the mail arrived at
the MTA for processing. A border MTA MAY also delete any discovered
instance of this header which claims to have been added within its
trust boundary. For example, a border MTA at mx.example.com MUST
delete any instance of this header claiming to come from mx.exam-
ple.com and MAY delete any instance of this header claiming to come
from any host in example.com prior to adding its own headers. This
applies in both directions so that hosts outside the domain cannot
claim results MUAs inside the domain might trust.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html